Page 327 - Law and the Media

Law and the Media
However, modern Scottish commentators tend to favour the English definition:

. . . would the words tend to lower the plaintiff in the estimation of right-thinking
members of society generally?
(Sim v Stretch (1936))

Cultural differences within Scotland may influence the meaning of ‘society’. In 1990, the
Stornoway Gazette paid damages to the local MP, Calum MacDonald, in respect of a letter
that criticized him for not voting in favour of legislation intended to prevent the promotion
of homosexuality. Although such an allegation would probably not have been considered
defamatory in most parts of Scotland, it clearly was in the Western Isles.

However, the Scottish courts are increasingly unlikely to accept the views of ‘splinter
groups’ of society. In the case of Bell v Bell’s Trustee (2001) it was held that it was of no
assistance to the pursuer, or claimant, to say that:

. . . an allegation is damaging in the section of society to which he belongs if it is
not also disparaging in the view of society as a whole.

20.2.2 Innuendo

As in England, innuendo may found an action for defamation.

In Russell v Stubbs (1913), the appearance of the name of the pursuer on a list of debtors with
a note attached to the list implied nothing other than the fact that the name appeared on the
court books and was not capable of bearing the innuendo that the pursuer was impecunious.
In Stein v Beaverbrook Newspapers Limited (1968), the innuendo that the pursuer was a
hypocrite was held to have been properly inferred from a reference that the pursuer had
campaigned against chequebook journalism whilst engaging in it himself. In Morrison v
Ritchie (1902), the innuendo arose from a newspaper announcement of the birth of twins to
a couple who had married the previous month.

20.2.3 Class actions

As in England, members of a class of persons can sue if the class is sufficiently well defined
for the defamation to be held to apply to them as individuals.

In Macphail v Macleod (1895) it was established that a particular minister could not sue on
an attack against ministers generally, but could sue on a charge of drunkenness against the
ministers in his presbytery. In Baigent v BBC (1999) a total award of £60 000 was made to
three members of a family, none of whom had been individually mentioned, in respect of a
programme to which the family as a whole took objection.
290